The United Kingdom stands at a crossroads. Last week, a new geological survey from the British Geological Survey (BGS) confirmed that the Bowland Shale formation under northern England holds an estimated 1,300 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. For context, that is enough to power the nation for over 50 years at current consumption rates. But there is a catch. Extracting this gas via hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking, carries a price tag that goes beyond the monetary.
Since the moratorium was imposed in 2019, following a series of minor seismic events linked to operations near Blackpool, the debate has lain dormant. Yet with energy prices soaring and net-zero deadlines looming, the question returns: should we frack?
First, the science. Shale gas is a fossil fuel, release vast reserves of methane. The carbon intensity of fracked gas is comparable to conventional gas, but a fraction of coal. However, methane leakage during extraction and transport can be significant. The IPCC estimates that a 3% leakage rate erases any climate advantage over coal. Current UK monitoring suggests leakage rates are around 2%, but that is based on limited data. We need better measurements, not assumptions.
Then there is the seismic risk. The BGS has mapped over 50 minor earthquakes directly linked to fracking at the Preston New Road site. Most were below magnitude 1.5, barely felt. But the largest, a magnitude 2.9 event, triggered the moratorium. Seismologists argue that induced seismicity from fracking is generally less risky than natural earthquakes, because we control the timing and location. But public trust is fragile. A 2022 survey by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy found that only 17% of Britons support fracking, down from 21% in 2019. Trust, once broken, is not easily restored.
Economically, the picture is complex. The cost of extracting shale gas in the UK is significantly higher than in the United States, due to deeper geology, denser drilling regulations, and public opposition. A 2023 report by the Office for Budget Responsibility estimated that the breakeven price for UK fracking is around 60 pence per therm, compared to 20 pence for U.S. gas. This means that fracked gas from the Bowland Shale would be profitable only at sustained high prices, exactly when consumers are already struggling. It is not a panacea for energy poverty.
Then there is the timeline. Even if the moratorium were lifted today, it would take at least five years to establish production at scale. Professor John Underhill, a geologist at Heriot-Watt University, notes that the UK lacks the seismic imaging, drilling rigs, and supply chains already built up in the United States. We would be starting from scratch, while renewables like offshore wind are being deployed at record speed. In 2023, wind power generated 32% of UK electricity, up from 14% in 2015. The Committee on Climate Change expects that to reach 50% by 2030. Fracking risks being a distraction.
But what about energy security? After Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the UK government has been desperate to cut reliance on foreign imports. Last winter, the country relied on gas from Norway, Qatar, and the United States. Domestic shale gas could theoretically reduce that, but the volumes are uncertain. The BGS survey is an estimate, not a production profile. The Institute of Directors estimates that fracking could meet 15-20% of UK gas demand by 2030, nowhere near independence.
Here is the real dilemma: every pound spent on fracking is a pound not spent on renewables, efficiency, or nuclear. Energy expert Dr John Loughhead, former chief scientific advisor at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, argues that the path to net-zero is straightforward: electrify everything, decarbonise the grid, and invest in storage. Fracking does not fit into that vision. It would maintain gas infrastructure that must eventually be phased out.
The climate clock is ticking. We have already warmed the planet by 1.2 degrees Celsius. Every new fossil fuel extraction locks in future emissions. The IPCC is clear: to stay below 1.5 degrees, global carbon emissions must fall 45% by 2030. The UK has a legal obligation to reach net-zero by 2050. Fracking would add a new source of emissions just when we need to be tapering off.
There is no easy answer. The gas under our feet is abundant, but extracting it is expensive in every sense. It carries financial risk, seismic uncertainty, and a carbon penalty. As the government weighs the evidence against public opinion, the world watches. Do we reopen old wounds for a short term fix, or invest forward into a renewable future? The data is clear, but the politics are not.
Dr Helena Vance. Science and Climate Correspondent.
